Spy Pond Partners

Leni Oman, Chair, NCHRP 20-75 Panel

Amanda J. Wilson, National Transportation Library

Frances D. Harrison, NCHRP 20-75 Principal Investigator

NCHRP 20-75 – Implementing Transportation Knowledge Networks

Briefing for TRB State Representatives

Orlando, Florida

July 2009

WSDOT

2

Topics

• The information problem

• What is needed?

• Key strategies:• Knowledge Mapping • Communities of Practice • Findability• Transportation Knowledge Networks

• Transportation Knowledge Networks and TRB – Opportunities

• What you can do

3

The Information Problem

• 80% of an organization’s information content is unmanaged

• 15-35% of employees’ time spent searching for information

• Agencies losing brain trust• 40-50% of the transportation workforce will be eligible to retire within 10 years. • Reduction in Force

• Work trends• More specialization and less cross-training/mentoring• “Just in time” information consumption• Demographic changes/changing information expectations

• Explosion of information available – especially digital • 135% growth in Internet Usage in North American 2000-2008 • Impossible to keep up – even for niche areas• Relevance is critical – and needs improvement

• Even so only 16-19% of Internet content is searchable• Not all agencies make their information accessible

4

Current Information Management

• Fishing in a Bucket• Ask a colleague• Scan a few familiar resources (e.g. NCHRP Synthesis reports, recent conference

proceedings)• Google search

• Agencies paying for the same information multiple times

• Staff and consultants spending valuable time searching for information and often missing what is of most value

• New research not benefiting from what is already known

• Practitioners reinventing approaches when they could piggyback on existing ones

• Responsibility for transportation knowledge capture not shared throughout industry

There is a better way

5

What is Needed?

1. Make it easier for transportation agencies to identify, capture and preserve information of value

2. Make it easier for people to find information when they need it – from their peers, catalogs, digital and physical collections.

3. Minimize the time it takes to access information that helps us operate more efficiently and effectively

4. Mitigate loss of institutional knowledge resulting from employee departures

Reports

Manuals

Images

Lessons Learned

Data Sets

Web Links

Articles

Events

“Know who”

Capture Discover

6

Key Strategies1. Facilitate person to person knowledge sharing within and across

organizations –

Diagnose current state with Knowledge Mapping Techniques

Support knowledge sharing and creation within Communities of Practice - groups of professionals with common interests and goals.

2. Improve Findability – implement tools and techniques for information discovery

3. Strengthen Knowledge Networks - build and support an information sharing infrastructure across organizations to:

Ensure that valuable information is captured, collected and stored so that it can be easily discovered

Improve availability of filtered, synthesized and compiled information that can be rapidly absorbed

7

The Human Knowledge Base

Electronic & Paper

Files

Human Database

• Some knowledge is explicit and can be captured in electronic or paper files.

• Some knowledge is tacit, resides within our way of knowing and doing our work. It can be difficult to capture and highly context specific.

• This information is most frequently shared through networking, mentoring and discussions with colleagues

• Organizational Network Analysis – knowledge mapping – helps identify priority actions.

8

Example from Virginia DOT

• A knowledge map allows you to identify connections and creates opportunities for questions, like:

• Are certain people over-subscribed with questions or requests for information?

• Are there opportunities for individuals to be paired so as to distribute information or responsibilities more evenly?

• Are some groups or individuals not connected at all?

• Where are people getting their information?

• Who are the strong communicators? What can you do to mimic that pattern?

9

Mapping Connections between TRB Committees 2 Committees within Technical Activities Council

4 Sections and 33 committees within Policy & Organization Group

2 Sections and 28 committees within Operations & Preservation Group

8 Sections and 62 committees within Design & Construction Group

4 Sections and 25 committees within Environment & Planning Group

2 Sections and 19 committees within System Users Group

15 committees within Public Transportation Group

8 committees within Rail Group

10 committees within Aviation Group

11 committees within Freight Systems Group

5 committees within Marine Group

7 committees within Legal Resources Group

Each Committee has about 18

members

10

TRB Committees interested in Knowledge Management

• ABJ00 – Data and Information Section

• ABJ20 - Statewide Transportation Data and Information Systems Committee

• ABC10 - Strategic Management Committee 

• ABC40 - Transportation Asset Management Committee 

• ABG30 - Technology Transfer Committee 

• ABG20 - Transportation Education and Training Committee 

• ABG40 - Library and Information Science for Transportation Committee 

• ABG50 - Transportation History Committee 

• AP000 - Public Transportation Group 

• AHD15 - Maintenance and Operations Personnel Committee 

• ABJ95 - Visualization in Transportation Committee 

• and more….

11

Communities of Practice and Communities of Interest Dimensions communities of practice

(CoPs) communities of interest (CoIs)

nature of problems different tasks in the same domain

common task across multiple domains

knowledge development

refinement of one knowledge system; new ideas coming from within the practice

synthesis and mutual learning through the integration of multiple knowledge systems

major objectives codified knowledge, domain coverage

shared understanding; making all voices heard

weaknesses group think lack of shared understanding

strengths shared ontologies social creativity; diversity; making all voices heard

people beginners and experts; apprentices and masters

stakeholders (owners of problems) from different perspectives

learning

legitimate peripheral participation

informed participation

From Richard Claassens, Information Architect, SNS Bank, the Netherlands

12

Finding Transportation Communities

CoIs Example : RITA• http://www.transportationresearch.gov

CoPs Example : FHWA• http://knowledge.fhwa.dot.gov/cops/FHWAKnowExt.nsf/pages/index.html

CoPs in Research Example : Pavement Interactive• http://pavementinteractive.org/index.php?title=Main_Page

CoPs in TRB Example :• Ning: http://transportationresearch.ning.com/• Look for TRB on LinkedIn and Facebook too

13

TRB Committees as Communities of Practice?

• MODELS

Example Ad Hoc CoP: Web2.0/New Media/Social Media

• CHALLENGES• Start new CoPs or integrate with existing CoPs?• Dedicated liaison from each committee proactively contributing to CoP• Avoid appearance of “extra layer” above and beyond the sheer number and scope of

TRB Technical Committees• Integration with list serves, websites, and other established forms of communication

1 committee = 1 CoP >1 committee = 1 CoP

(cross-cutting issues)

Standing vs. Ad hoc COPs

14

Solution: Improve Findability of High Quality Transportation Information

• The quality of being able to locate or navigate.

• The degree to which a particular object is easy to discover or locate.

• The degree to which a physical or digital environment supports navigation and search (retrieval).

Peter Morville (2005)--Ambient Findability: What we find changes who we becomePeter Morville (2005)--Ambient Findability: What we find changes who we become

&/or

Information Professionals

Source: flickr.comSource: www.cobbcat.org

15

Source: http://www.ijdc.net/index.php/ijdc/article/viewFile/69/48

16

Are you finding what you think you’re finding?Are you finding what you think you’re finding?

The WWW & Invisible Web• World Wide Web consists of “surface web” and “invisible web”

• Search engines index the surface web (Google, Yahoo, Clusty.com)• Invisible web is not accessible by web crawlers

• 550 times larger than surface web**• (more) high quality information• excluded by search engine policy

**number varies

The Invisible WebThe Invisible Web

• Dynamic content: database-drivenDynamic content: database-driven

• Unlinked content: pages not linked to by othersUnlinked content: pages not linked to by others

• Private web: sites requiring login or registrationPrivate web: sites requiring login or registration

• Contextual web: content governed by access controlsContextual web: content governed by access controls

• Limited access content: sites blocking web crawlersLimited access content: sites blocking web crawlers

Surface

Web

Invisible

Web

17

Tips on How to Improve Findability of Your Digital Information

*Information is Created/Received

• Full-text searchable PDF documents (OCR)*

• Add metadata • “Properties” in most Microsoft

applications• include Transportation Research

Thesaurus terms for topcial description• Use of HTML <meta> & <alt> tags for

web pages

• Consistent file & URL naming

• Use of open standards• example: Sitemaps.xml protocol

• Ensure your research is getting to your library *and* TRIS

*often solved when resources are made Section 508 compliant

*Information for Access/Use/Reuse

• Resources available in open formats• PDF• HTML• XML/RDF

• Resources available in multiple formats• PDF, native format (e.g., Word, .PPT), and

HTML• .CSV and native format (ARCGIS, SAS) for

data

• Digitize and index your resources• High quality digital master images• Metadata covering topic, date, attribution

• Publish local standards and guidelines• Codebooks for datasets• Metadata profiles for databases

18

What Info Professionals are Doing about Findability

• Semantic Web• Applying meaning to web for search engines and other web applications• Requires knowledge representation (information professionals)• Requires machine-processable, repurposable data (entire community)

• What needs meaning?• People/Organizations • Topics• Location• Relationships

• Creation of Linked Data• Id.loc.govTRANSPORTATION: Transportation Research Thesaurus, other thesauri, taxonomies, and

ontologies

• Virtual International Authority FileTRANSPORTATION: TRIS, COPs, TRB Committees

Source: www.facebook.com

19

Source: Flickr.com

Source: okbridge.com

Source: www.georgiacenter.uga.edu

Source: communications.howstuffworks.com

Source: wired.com

20

2.97 12.9 25

320

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1

Library

$ (m

illi

on

s)

How Do We Compare?

• National Library of Medicine• MeSH 23,000 terms, • >150K supplementary records, thousands of

cross references• 11 staff managing the thesaurus• Index over 4800 professional journals• PubMed and MedLinePlus

• National Agricultural Library• NALT >68,500 terms• 7 staff managing the thesaurus• Have indexed over 4 million records• Custom user interfaces

• National Transportation Library• TRT <10,000 terms• Indexing is a part time duty between 4 FTE• 600,000 records in TRIS • Very limited customer user interfaces

NLM

NTLNAL

Request~ Have

Annual Library Budget

21

Timeline

2001MTKN Pilot

Jun-03Scoping Study forNatl Strategic Plan

for Transportation Information Management

Jan 06TRB SR284

TKNs: A Management Strategy for the 21st Century

Aug 07WTKN

Nov 08ETKN

Aug 07 - Sep 09NCHRP 20-75

Oct 05 - Dec 09Transportation Library Connectivity Study

Apr-04TLCat

Mar-08RAC TKN

Task Force

22

Transportation Knowledge Networks TRB Special Report 284

Recommendations Proposed a network of Transportation Knowledge Networks with a National Coordinating Structure

Need for a strong governing body to provide policy, oversight, and to act as a champion for transportation information and Transportation Knowledge Networks

Seek broad-based funding support from multiple sources to sustain operations.

Provide federal grants for start up Grow federal funds Develop local match

NCHRP project to develop a business plan Transportation Research Board of the National

Academies 2006

23

Transportation Knowledge Networks - 2009

Map courtesy of the Transportation Library Connectivity Pooled Fund Study - TPF-5(105)

3 Regional TKNs

49 total member agencies : State DOTs, MPOs, Transit Agencies, Private Firms, Universities

Pooled Fund Study focusing on library connectivity and providing some support for TKN activities

A TKN is a network of transportation organizations that collaborate to share their information

WTKN MTKN ETKN

Pooled Fund Study Members

24

• Alaska Department of Transportation

• Arizona Transportation Research Center

• California Department of Transportation

• Idaho Transportation Department

• Montana Department of Transportation

• Oregon DOT

• Utah State DOT

• Washington State DOT

• University of California, Institute of Transportation Studies

• Texas A&M University

• University of Texas at Austin/Texas Center for Transportation Research

• Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority

• Puget Sound Regional Council

• Sound Transit

• PACCAR, Inc.

• American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

• Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission

• Illinois DOT Policy and Research Center

• Iowa DOT

• Kansas DOT

• Michigan DOT

• Minnesota DOT

• Missouri DOT

• Ohio DOT

• South Dakota DOT

• Wisconsin DOT

• University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute

• Northwestern University

• University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies

• Hanson Professional Services

• Portland Cement Association

• Wiss, Janney, Elstner Associates, Inc.

• Connecticut DOT

• Massachusetts State Transportation Library

• Mississippi DOT

• New Jersey DOT

• New York State DOT

• North Carolina DOT

• PennDOT

• Tennessee DOT

• Virginia DOT

• Louisiana Transportation Research Center

• University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center

• Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission

• Transportation Research Board Library

• AASHTO Information Center

• FHWA Research Library

• Volpe Technical Reference Center

• Community Transportation Association of America

• GRA, Inc.

WTKN MTKN ETKN

Transportation Knowledge Networks - 2009

25

Transportation Knowledge Networks - 2009

Example Membership Criteria (Eastern TKN):• Be involved in transportation research and/or practice

• Have library or information services, or a related department with an accessible collection of transportation information resources available to TKN members

• Have cataloged or systematically organized collections • Be willing and able to provide access to local collections and services

• Designate a representative responsible for communicating with other TKN members.

Example TKN Activities:

• Contribution of topical material to central information portals

• Posting of member research links to common web page

• Cataloging of information into a “union” catalog for transportation

• Digitization of state DOT high-use, high-value materials

• Networking & capacity building among membership

Example Mission (Western TKN):

Connect transportation resources and information from (member) organizations to facilitate research and implementation

26

Example: Climate Change Clearinghouse

TKN MembersState Climate Change Portals

White Papers

Regional Initiatives

27

NCHRP 20-75 Outreach Findings What is Needed?

• One stop shopping for transportation information

• Improved search tools

• Value-added services to filter & annotate information

• Peer-to-peer sharing of best practices

• Capture of “missing” information resources

• Greater access to digital documents

• Cataloging to enable sharing of documents across organizations

• Preservation of information resources to ensure continuing availability

28

Comments on the Value of TKNs

“The issue of workforce retention, workforce turnover, and loss of knowledge as a result of that turnover of experienced staff [is] the number one issue of concern to me. To the extent that knowledge networks can be an effective tool in trying to address that issue, it becomes a tool that’s addressing my number one priority”- Neil Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland SHA

“Having the capability to access what’s going on, whether it’s in research or whether it’s in best practices, is tremendously important for [innovators] to help create their own approaches in their own organizations. Transportation Knowledge Networks are very important to provide information to be able to learn what others are doing to grapple with these questions.”

- Bob Johns, Director, University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies

29

Comments on the Value of TKNs[The medical sector] invested in the deposits and repositories for information. If you go to the National Library of Medicine, you can see what the human genome looks like and you can find out every chromosome that’s on there, and that information is helpful to the person working on the next cure for cancer as well as the cancer patient.

[The medical sector has] really benefited from this concept of building distributed knowledge networks, and I think when we look at transportation, it’s just ripe for an innovator to come in and talk about how information can radically change the way that we move people, goods, and services around this country.

This vision of building a cooperative information network is different from the Internet itself. In other words, it’s not just enough to take all the digital data that we have and give it a URL and pop it on the Net and say 'good luck.' There is work that needs to go into prioritizing that information and finding that information. Just putting it online and searching Google isn’t good enough.

- R. David Lankes, Associate Professor, Syracuse University, School of Information Studies

30

AASHTO Standing Committee on HighwaysA survey of SCOH members was conducted in May of 2008. 85% of the respondents thought a TKN would add value for transportation agencies.

Which arguments for transportation knowledge networks did you find to be compelling? Response %

Response Count

One stop shopping capability would make searching for transportation information easier and more efficient

78.6% 22

Opportunities to reuse/adapt analysis tools and reports developed at peer agencies 75.0% 21All agencies will benefit from a national investment in information sharing 75.0% 21Improved ability to keep up with what peer agencies are doing 71.4% 20The opportunity to deliver clear and concise information about transportation issues to the public. 50.0% 14Improved ability to get new staff and consultants up to speed 46.4% 13Providing new services for the next generation "born digital" workforce in transportation 42.9% 12The need and ability to capture institutional knowledge before employees leave or retire. 32.1% 9Current investment in transportation information services is very low relative to other fields 14.3% 4

31

• Mix of technology, coordination/collaboration, and programs

• Mix of centralized and decentralized elements

• Clear roles for national coordinator and regional TKNs

• Focus on “hot topics” and innovation to demonstrate value

• Emphasis on how TKNs can increase efficiencies

• Clear accountability

NCHRP 20-75 Outreach FindingsWhat Should the Business Plan Contain?

If a national transportation information portal were created, what types of content would be useful for the scope of responsibilities you manage?

Response %

Response Count

Key transportation facts (gas tax by state, which states are using variable pricing...) 96.4% 27State of the practice/Lessons Learned resources 89.3% 25Current Policies and Procedures 82.1% 23Research reports 75.0% 21Industry Standards and Guidelines 60.7% 17Directory of transportation professionals across the nation 60.7% 17Data sources 50.0% 14Event data (national and regional meetings and conferences) 35.7% 10

Other (please specify) 1There should be a blog for recent retirees. One of their issues to adjust is that they have a career of knowledge to share

but unless they consult they have no voice or venue to mentor and advise.

32

NCHRP 20-75 Business Plan

• Context Section

• Background

• Mission, Goals and Objectives

• Market

• Products and Services

• Stewardship Model

• Estimated Costs – $13.5 million per year• $7.9 mill for content• $3.1 mill technical/administrative infrastructure• $1.5 mill outreach/education• $1 mill research/literature review services

• Roughly 50% of funds to be distributed as grants to TKN member organizations for content development and services

33

Future Vision: Information Sharing Infrastructure

• Technical & Administrative Infrastructure ($3.1 million annually)• National Transportation Portal with Federated Search• National Information Repositories

• Digital - documents & data• Print – archive copies for preservation

• Standards Coordination + Thesaurus (improve findability through consistent tagging and semantic links)

• Content ($7.9 million annually)• Information Modules (e.g. event calendars, directories, topical pages) – feed into national portal,

available for other web sites/portals• Targeted Collection & Digitization Efforts• Group Subscriptions to Commercial Content

• Outreach, Coordination and Communication ($1.5 million annually)• End-Users• Libraries• Non-Library Information Providers

• Research/ Literature Review Services ($1 million annually)• Coordination for maximum coverage and availability

34

Future Vision: Information Sharing Infrastructure

Transportation Information Portal(provided by national TKN coordination function – components available for incorporation into other web pages)

Find Information

Ask a Question

Event Calendar

Find a Person

Submit a Resource

Research in

ProgressNews

Communities of Practice

Transportation Topics

Information Resources & Tools (Responsibility for coordination, contributions and maintenance shared across TKNs/Information Providers)

Standards & Crosswalks(metadata, thesaurus, taxonomy)

Knowledge Services & Protocols(Resource archiving, digitization, cataloging, bulk purchasing, interlibrary loan)

US DOTRITA, Modal Admins

State DOTs

TRB(TRIS, RiP, Needs)

Universities MPOs

GIS DataTabular

DatasetsStandards & Guidelines

Manuals DirectoriesImages &

Video

Tutorials LegislationLessons Learned

EventsPerformance

DataCommercial Databases

Library Resources

OCLC, TLCat, First Search

Other Federal Agencies

Local JurisdictionsAASHTO

Industry, Non-Profits

Broad Participation

Central Portal

Diverse Resources

Common Standards

35

Information Need Scenario

• A winter storm brings traffic to a standstill on a 20 mile section of an Interstate Highway. Motorists are stranded for hours. Following this incident, the state DOT Secretary requests a review of how to avoid this situation in the future.

36

Vision: Avoid Reinventing the Wheel

1. Find Similar Incident 2. Find Close Match with Needs

3. Adapt & Share

37

Vision: TKNs Make it Happen

• Find & Access Information• The National TKN Coordinating Body subscribes to information services such as

Elselvier, ScienceDirect, Lexis-Nexis, ProQuest, and Dow Jones Factiva and makes these available to all TKN members.

• According to the TKN collection development policy, TKN members submit their organizations’ research reports, manuals, consultant studies, and other publications to an identified information repository.

• TKN members tag the resources so that they can be found• The National TKN Coordinating Body provides the technical infrastructure to

maintain access to these resources.

• Contacts• The National TKN Coordinating Body sets the structure, each TKN adds and

updates own directory.

• Submit Resources• Individuals may submit resources, which are then indexed and made accessible

by the National TKN Coordinating Body or TKN member library.

• Ask a Question• TKN Members handle information requests

• Communities of Practice• TKN topic leaders maintain the list of communities of practice.

38

Future Vision – TKN Members

State DOTs

Data Providers

Libraries

Other (research centers, webmasters, publications, public affairs offices)

MPO’s Service Providers

Universities

Private FirmsLocal/ Public Works

Associations

US DOTTRB Other Federal

International

LTAP/TTAP

39

Directory of Libraries and Transportation Information Centers

• Schedule: February 2009 - October 2009

• Participants: Collaborative effort of NTL, NCHRP 20-75A Team, SLA-TD, Regional TKNs and Pooled Fund Study Members

• Target Contents• Transportation Libraries• General Purpose Libraries with Significant Transportation Collections• State DOT, MPO, and larger (top 50) Transit Agency data and publications offices (where

formal libraries do not exist)• USDOT Modal Administrations• LTAP Centers• Associations (updates for those in current NTL directory)• Private Firms• Local Transportation/Public Works Agencies• Major international transportation information sources

• Purpose: • Develop an electronic, web-based directory of U.S. transportation librarians, libraries and information centers that could

participate in any of a number of ways in TKNs and take responsibility for collecting and providing access to the reports, research, and technical information of their own organizations. This directory should support queries and reporting.

40

TKNs and TRB – Opportunities

• TRB Mission Statement (Excerpts)• Promote innovation and progress in transportation through research• Facilitate sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers

and practitioners• Disseminate research results broadly and encourage their implementation

• TKNs align directly with this mission – enabling researchers and practitioners to find information when it is needed and apply it

• Potential TKN-TRB Committee Collaboration Opportunities• TRB committees can post their unpublished information resources in a national digital

repository • TRB committee members could use portal to develop research agendas, identify

timely session topics and speakers• TKN members could support TRB committee development of research statements by

providing literature review services • TRB committee members could serve as topic leaders for portal • TRB committees can identify critical and emerging information dissemination needs

for TKNs

41

What You Can Do

• Meet with members of your staff to answer the following questions• What kinds of information resources would members of my organization most like to have easy access to?• What additional help do we need to get our hands on timely and relevant information?• What information resources do we have that others would be interested in – consultant studies, policies &

procedures, manuals, training materials, data sets…• What would it take to make these available to other organizations? What help would we need to do this?

• Contact your regional TKN: www.etkn.org, www.wtkn.org, www.mtkn.org • Find out what they are doing• Identify areas of common interest and mutual benefit• Join/designate a contact person from your organization• Participate in an information sharing initiative

• Put your information sources on the map• If you have a library, support cataloging of resources into OCLC• Adopt standard file naming and formatting conventions to facilitate discovery of your documents• If you have a library, data office, or publications office that is willing to make reports, data sets, maps, or other

information resources available to the broader transportation community, make sure they are listed in the national directory of transportation libraries and information centers

• Participate in the Library Connectivity Pooled Fund Study

• Help shape future TKN effortsCommunicate your ideas to the AASHTO RAC TKN Task Force and the TRB LIST Committee

• Indentify a point person in your organization for information sharing